What do you think should be on CIV4 (improvements from CIV3)?
- Thread starter Iraqi_Tank
- Start date
Sims2789
Fool me once...
My list:
[SIZE=5[COLOR=blue]Neanderthals[/SIZE][/COLOR] (they were a sub-species of humans, scientific name Homo Sapien Neanderthalis. They are closer to Humans than Chimps are to Bonobos, though both humans & neanderthals and chimps & bonobos are both sub-species of each other.)
Nubia
Israel
Byzantine Empire (i know it's also the Eastern Roman Empire, but they lasted 1000 years longer than the Western Roman Empire)
Inca
Maya
Portugaul
Scotland
New Features:
civ's can rebel(i.e., part of the United States can try to break off and form it's own civ). each rebel civ would have names ( like Confederates) and would start off slightly behind and with the same government as the country they broke off from.
________
VOLCANO CLASSIC
[SIZE=5[COLOR=blue]Neanderthals[/SIZE][/COLOR] (they were a sub-species of humans, scientific name Homo Sapien Neanderthalis. They are closer to Humans than Chimps are to Bonobos, though both humans & neanderthals and chimps & bonobos are both sub-species of each other.)
Nubia
Israel
Byzantine Empire (i know it's also the Eastern Roman Empire, but they lasted 1000 years longer than the Western Roman Empire)
Inca
Maya
Portugaul
Scotland
New Features:
civ's can rebel(i.e., part of the United States can try to break off and form it's own civ). each rebel civ would have names ( like Confederates) and would start off slightly behind and with the same government as the country they broke off from.
________
VOLCANO CLASSIC
Zarn
Le Républicain Catholique
I wouldn't like neanderthals.
Louis XXIV
Le Roi Soleil
I want
Israel
Inca
Maya
Byzantine
But why Civ4?
Why not an expansion of Civ3?
Israel
Inca
Maya
Byzantine
But why Civ4?
Why not an expansion of Civ3?
i think progpaganda shall not be used in a way to cause an opponent city to become yours. instead it should cause independence of a city (or a number of cities), forming a new nation (probably its new government is the same type of the propaganda-initiator).
holy king
Deity
maybe a great wonder creating some kind of science boost
need not to be a to build wonder necesesarily, could also be landing an explorer unit with a chance of dying during the journey to the pole or something
would you like to see the game take some measures to better reflect RL history in some ways, or at least bring a semblance of the actual course of Civilizations in a new a civ game?
for instance, you can have the option of starting out with only certain ancient civs, and the world is filled with invisable 'regions' of primitive tribes that you conquer when you build upon them, but over time these ppls might break away from your empire?
i.e, you as the Romans build up in some distant land, only to find the locals who mingled in your cities decide they want independence, and all the cities in the designated region revolt and call themselves French and their new land France.
You could choose to join the Revolutionaries (i know, the idea has passed around before by others, i claim it not) and become the leader of the new french cities, or stay Roman and either try to crush the rebels or grant independence.
Than your cities on England (or another land mass/area on a random map) declare themselves independent as the English. You could choose again if you stayed Roman. Than say you become English, build up on a foreign continent, and find your cities there revolting and trying to become American.
Since the primitive tribes are region based, no extra string of succesors is needed for each civ. instead, a region would determine what the revolting ppl would call themselves. therefore, even chinese cities in the region of America would become american if China lost its hold on them. Or from Spain could come Canada, a region north of America.
Any cities of any civ in the region of Australia would become united as that one nation. Even if they were all from seperate civs. Thus the globe would change over the course of time and give you the player a more challenging game and a wider scope of covering history.
or, of course, you could turn regions off, and certain region civs into the game from the start. (i.e Americans, Canadians, Australians even)
some regions would only be regional tribes and non-playable.
That is my new concept for Civ and historical semblance.
or perhaps history could be implemented other ways if you want history.
or you could rather not see much more historical accuracy in the game.
i look forward to your opinions.
for instance, you can have the option of starting out with only certain ancient civs, and the world is filled with invisable 'regions' of primitive tribes that you conquer when you build upon them, but over time these ppls might break away from your empire?
i.e, you as the Romans build up in some distant land, only to find the locals who mingled in your cities decide they want independence, and all the cities in the designated region revolt and call themselves French and their new land France.
You could choose to join the Revolutionaries (i know, the idea has passed around before by others, i claim it not) and become the leader of the new french cities, or stay Roman and either try to crush the rebels or grant independence.
Than your cities on England (or another land mass/area on a random map) declare themselves independent as the English. You could choose again if you stayed Roman. Than say you become English, build up on a foreign continent, and find your cities there revolting and trying to become American.
Since the primitive tribes are region based, no extra string of succesors is needed for each civ. instead, a region would determine what the revolting ppl would call themselves. therefore, even chinese cities in the region of America would become american if China lost its hold on them. Or from Spain could come Canada, a region north of America.
Any cities of any civ in the region of Australia would become united as that one nation. Even if they were all from seperate civs. Thus the globe would change over the course of time and give you the player a more challenging game and a wider scope of covering history.
or, of course, you could turn regions off, and certain region civs into the game from the start. (i.e Americans, Canadians, Australians even)
some regions would only be regional tribes and non-playable.
That is my new concept for Civ and historical semblance.
or perhaps history could be implemented other ways if you want history.
or you could rather not see much more historical accuracy in the game.
i look forward to your opinions.
adding to my regional model - regions would also be responsible for barbarians. the ethnic barbarian system would be changed so that, on the American region you'd find Native tribes - Sioux, Blackfoot, etc.
And also, city names would be regionalized, cities built on Canadian region would take up a Canadian name - i.e Quebec, Montreal, even if Japan built the city. You could say cities are given names based on the local culture.
And also, city names would be regionalized, cities built on Canadian region would take up a Canadian name - i.e Quebec, Montreal, even if Japan built the city. You could say cities are given names based on the local culture.
I like your ideas overall. In particular, the idea of civs factioning to create more nations as the game plays out sounds like fun.
I'd also like to see many, many more great wonders, but have them limited by culture group. No U.S. Sun Tzul, or Chinese J.S. Cathedral.
Equivelents, yes, but not those specific to a particular culture or religion.
I'd also like to see many, many more great wonders, but have them limited by culture group. No U.S. Sun Tzul, or Chinese J.S. Cathedral.
Equivelents, yes, but not those specific to a particular culture or religion.
Yoshi En Son
Chieftain
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2003
- Messages
- 2
Ok, first off - Civ 3 is a great game overall... but the one thing that is seriously lacks, is replayability.
After finishing the game a few different ways the game gets very very very repetetive.
I started with thinking about what 4X games I like and the most enjoable two that I've played are : MOO2 (never played the orriginal or MoO3) and MoM.
The best thing about both of those games is the replayability of each of them. You set up your race/wizard's profile - then go on to play the game with many differing play styles available.
I'd like to see that in a CIV4 game.
Imagine a game that was an incorporation of MoM and Civ3!
The story :
Each player starts the game as a member of the "Wizards" Race. This is a Race of immortals that strive against each other for control of the planet. The "humans" that live on the planet have split off to follow a wizard so that each Wizard has a following of humans. Temples and such that are built are to honor you, the Wizard (or Diety - if you wish).
The game would begin with customizing your wizard in much the same way as was done in MoM.
Then play the game in a very similar way to CIV3, with the addition of being able to cast magic from the Wizard in the same style as was done in MoM, and magic is learned in a very similar manner.
Heroes/Leaders. I love the idea of Heroes appearing after a unit becomes Elite, but I believe that the Leaders should be unique in their abilities in a manner that represents the type of unit that it was created from. For example : say you have a unit of archers that produces a leader. Give the leader a name and he becomes an army immediately that could give a bonus to archers that are part of the army.... then say you move that army to a city, then have the ability to disband the army to put the leader into a position in the city (which would make the city do better in one area or another... examples of things that could be improved : Happiness level, production produced, cash produced, science produced, food produced, mana produced)
Mana, have the mana generated in much the same way as MoM. Use the Happy population as the base mana generated then add for temples/wonders/other things.
Spell Research would be done in very very much the same way as MoM did it; but I can't see that magic items would be able to work in the same way - maybe have a few magic artifacts that could be created which would be placed into cities to improve the city in some manner.
The technology tree should be very similar to what there is in Civ3 - but make it much more complex in a manner that no one would be expected to learn all the technologies. Make it so that a player could go through the game following a different tech tree each time. One of my biggest issues with Civ3 is the fact that everygame I learn just about every Technology.. in pretty much the same order; no variety - I don't care if that was the order they were learned in real life...
Thanks for reading, and any thoughts?
My main point was that I'd like customization and so many choices that the game could be played over and over and the game would be quite different each time. The current Civ 3 is a great game a few times through - but every game ends up looking the same after the first portion of the game. The map might look different; but the actual gameplay doesn't vary very much.
After finishing the game a few different ways the game gets very very very repetetive.
I started with thinking about what 4X games I like and the most enjoable two that I've played are : MOO2 (never played the orriginal or MoO3) and MoM.
The best thing about both of those games is the replayability of each of them. You set up your race/wizard's profile - then go on to play the game with many differing play styles available.
I'd like to see that in a CIV4 game.
Imagine a game that was an incorporation of MoM and Civ3!
The story :
Each player starts the game as a member of the "Wizards" Race. This is a Race of immortals that strive against each other for control of the planet. The "humans" that live on the planet have split off to follow a wizard so that each Wizard has a following of humans. Temples and such that are built are to honor you, the Wizard (or Diety - if you wish).
The game would begin with customizing your wizard in much the same way as was done in MoM.
Then play the game in a very similar way to CIV3, with the addition of being able to cast magic from the Wizard in the same style as was done in MoM, and magic is learned in a very similar manner.
Heroes/Leaders. I love the idea of Heroes appearing after a unit becomes Elite, but I believe that the Leaders should be unique in their abilities in a manner that represents the type of unit that it was created from. For example : say you have a unit of archers that produces a leader. Give the leader a name and he becomes an army immediately that could give a bonus to archers that are part of the army.... then say you move that army to a city, then have the ability to disband the army to put the leader into a position in the city (which would make the city do better in one area or another... examples of things that could be improved : Happiness level, production produced, cash produced, science produced, food produced, mana produced)
Mana, have the mana generated in much the same way as MoM. Use the Happy population as the base mana generated then add for temples/wonders/other things.
Spell Research would be done in very very much the same way as MoM did it; but I can't see that magic items would be able to work in the same way - maybe have a few magic artifacts that could be created which would be placed into cities to improve the city in some manner.
The technology tree should be very similar to what there is in Civ3 - but make it much more complex in a manner that no one would be expected to learn all the technologies. Make it so that a player could go through the game following a different tech tree each time. One of my biggest issues with Civ3 is the fact that everygame I learn just about every Technology.. in pretty much the same order; no variety - I don't care if that was the order they were learned in real life...
Thanks for reading, and any thoughts?
My main point was that I'd like customization and so many choices that the game could be played over and over and the game would be quite different each time. The current Civ 3 is a great game a few times through - but every game ends up looking the same after the first portion of the game. The map might look different; but the actual gameplay doesn't vary very much.
DiamondzAndGunz
Lurking
Well, I read it, and don't really like it. Not for civ. Perhaps if it was a seperate game, but not civ. Civ is a good enough game without magic/spells/mana, etc. You're supposed to be controlling a civilization from its roots all the way up to modern times, not casting spells.
Now, about the replayability- It has great replayability, if you ask me (and most likely just about anyone else on these boards). Never know what kind of terrain you're going to have to deal with, and what other things the computer will give you. Not to mention all the different scenarios/modpacks out right now.
Now, about the replayability- It has great replayability, if you ask me (and most likely just about anyone else on these boards). Never know what kind of terrain you're going to have to deal with, and what other things the computer will give you. Not to mention all the different scenarios/modpacks out right now.
Yoshi En Son
Chieftain
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2003
- Messages
- 2
But overall it doesn't really matter about the terrain. I've had the game installed on my computer for about .. 13-14 months and have played as every civilization and won every possible way on every map. The games don't really change from one to the next. Sure, the first couple hundred turns are still interesting for the reasons that you mention (as I stated in my original post), but beyond the first portion of the game it basically is either won or lost.. very rarely is it even close by time I get to looking for coal.
I know that most people on this board (myself included) enjoy the game; but that doesn't make the game perfect. I know that the magic idea and all will turn people off - and it isn't a needed item.. but I do like to have more customization. Maybe just having about 10 times the number of Techs to research would be good.. I hate having all of the tech with nothing left unlearned - that is pretty boring IMO.
I know that most people on this board (myself included) enjoy the game; but that doesn't make the game perfect. I know that the magic idea and all will turn people off - and it isn't a needed item.. but I do like to have more customization. Maybe just having about 10 times the number of Techs to research would be good.. I hate having all of the tech with nothing left unlearned - that is pretty boring IMO.
DiamondzAndGunz
Lurking
May I ask what difficulty you play on? 
Sure doesn't seem like you play too high a difficulty.
More techs might be a great idea. The DyP mod adds tons more techs, resources, units, improvements, just about anything that you could imagine.
Sure doesn't seem like you play too high a difficulty.More techs might be a great idea. The DyP mod adds tons more techs, resources, units, improvements, just about anything that you could imagine.
dguichar
Warlord
As you, my friend, i really enjoyed Master of Magic...
But what you're asking it's not Civ4, but MOM2.
You want a renewed engine with many Civ3 features to be taken into MOM.
I proposed a deeper traits system with levels in each one to make it more specific. I don't know if you would be able to find that old thread with the search engine.
I also don't know how people puts the links here
Keep civilized
David
But what you're asking it's not Civ4, but MOM2.
You want a renewed engine with many Civ3 features to be taken into MOM.
I proposed a deeper traits system with levels in each one to make it more specific. I don't know if you would be able to find that old thread with the search engine.
I also don't know how people puts the links here
Keep civilized
David
Louis XXIV
Le Roi Soleil
You should try making/playing a Mod/scenario
That will help with replayability
That will help with replayability
Huh? So the games are all boring and repetitive, yet you've played a full game over 24 times over 14 months?
I think your basic point is that you should be able to customize your civ at the beginning (is it?) instead of choosing out of 24 possible civs.
That's a fair proposal I guess, although nothing that I can see would dramatically increase replayability.
As for adding wizards and magic etc etc...umm..that could make for a good game, but that game should not have "Civilization" anywhere in its title.
-Sirp.
Similar threads
